Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Watch Keith Olbermann - Special Comment  
User currently offlineBobster2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 3 months 14 hours ago) and read 1252 times:

Olbermann just delivered a stunning "special comment" in place of his usual #1 story. It was a response to Rumsfeld's speech on terrorism. The rerun is at midnight eastern time, maybe there will be a transcript.

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 14 hours ago) and read 1252 times:

Quoting Bobster2 (Thread starter):
Watch Keith Olbermann - Special Comment

Perhaps you could indulge us all a little more.  irked 



Crye me a river
User currently offlineBobster2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 14 hours ago) and read 1236 times:

To be honest, I missed the first part so I need to watch the rerun myself.  Smile Keith was really passionate and emotional, something that he reserves for special occasions.

I also need to find out more about Rumsfeld's speech before I can comment.

[Edited 2006-08-31 03:32:05]

User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 13 hours ago) and read 1236 times:

The print version is at: www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12131617/

User currently offlineGilligan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 13 hours ago) and read 1208 times:

"We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law."

I bet Richard Jewel takes great comfort in that line every night.


“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,”

Nor should we tolerate disloyalty when presented as dissent, NY Times.

"The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms,"

Keith, name me one single freedom that has been taken away by this administration, just one that has, by law, been taken away. Please just one will do.

Rubbish from a man who if he believes all that he has said here would be driven to run for office but won't since it is so much easier to hurl insults from the safety of a studio where he has no critisim thrown back at him.


User currently offlineBobster2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 1192 times:

The Rumsfeld speech is here:

http://www.defenselink.mil/Utility/P...Speeches/Speech.aspx?SpeechID=1033


User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13170 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 1188 times:

I believe this in reference to a speech by Rumsfeld to the American Legion, a group of active and retired military servicemen. Basicly he played the line that if you are't part of us, you are morally confused. Yet he has never allowed moral confusion at Abu-Graith, Gitmo, and the CIA 'secret prisons'. I am glad to see some in the Mainstream Media taking on the massive stupidity of the Bush administration.

User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26718 posts, RR: 75
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 1162 times:

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 4):
Keith, name me one single freedom that has been taken away by this administration, just one that has, by law, been taken away. Please just one will do.

The stance taken against a newly conjured up idea of obscenity by the Bush appointed FCC is one.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7423 posts, RR: 50
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1123 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Bobster2 (Thread starter):
Olbermann just delivered a stunning "special comment" in place of his usual #1 story

Well, at least one person watched it. That's a 0.00000000000000000002 share in the ratings.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineGilligan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1123 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7):
The stance taken against a newly conjured up idea of obscenity by the Bush appointed FCC is one.

That would be a rule not a law and are suggesting that todays rules are more restrictive than in 1966 when on I Dream of Jeanie Barbra Eden was not allowed to show her naval? Or in the 1950's when Lucille Ball and Ricky Ricardo had to sleep in seperate beds even though they were married?


User currently offlineTurbo7x7 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 266 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1104 times:

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 4):
Rubbish from a man who if he believes all that he has said here would be driven to run for office but won't since it is so much easier to hurl insults from the safety of a studio where he has no critisim thrown back at him.

Well, the president and most of his staff make speeches in front of crowds that are usually very carefully vetted. And certainly Mr. O'Reilly from the very popular and powerful Fox News channel also launches his "talking points" (or what I consider to be GOP propaganda) from the safety of a studio. . . so why can't Mr. Olbermann?


User currently offlineTexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4284 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1096 times:

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Reply 10):
so why can't Mr. Olbermann?

Because he disagrees.

We can all form are opinions about what is going on. What we know is that our Legislative Branch has given up more power to our Executive Branch than at any other time in recent memory. We know that on some issues, some branches of government are no longer being checked and balanced in the same way they used to. That much was made clear when Congress voted to give the Executive the right to make war. There are people in the Administration who are trying to circumvent the rules put in place to allow for all people in this country to be free. This would not be truly exceptional since all Administrations do this to an extent, it is just the manner in which they are doing it, the extent to which they are willing to push the boundaries.

Gilligan and I do not agree on politics very often, but he is usually respectful and respects other people's opinions. Again, I don't necessarily agree with his arguments, but he has given examples of what he believes and he stands by them.

Look, this isn't going to be a perfect world. The one thing most of us can agree on is that politicians are lying scum, whether they are Republican or Democrat. Now that we've settled that, who's buying the first round?  Silly

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1087 times:

Here is the video:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/0...-hell-of-a-commentary-on-rumsfeld/

I thought it was brilliant.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineDeltaGator From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 6341 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1087 times:

It's not that I don't think Olberman isn't allowed to disagree with the Administration...it's that he is a total blowhard (and in the spirit of bipartianship so is O'Reilly and even Hannity for that matter) who should have never left Southern California local sports broadcasting. I've just never liked him or his style of reporting, whether sports or politics.

Damn you ESPN for giving this guy a chance!



"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1081 times:

Delta,

Did you watch the video? Why is what he said "being a blowhard"? Do you understand what he's replying to? The asinine statements of Donald Rumsfeld, who bascially called those that oppose the war fascist appeasers and insulted their intelligence. Considering that the majority of Americans now oppose the war, that was quite a weighty statement. Olbermann was responding to that with some pretty good logic, at least point out where you think he was wrong rather than just calling him "a blowhard".



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineDeltaGator From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 6341 posts, RR: 13
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1077 times:

I wasn't referring to just this one video so don't make assumptions. I'm talking about him in general and how I just don't like his style of reporting. Rummy is most definitely not on my Christmas Card list so don't attack me from that angle. I'm just saying I think Olberman sucks as a journalist.


"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
User currently offlineGilligan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1064 times:

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Reply 10):
Well, the president and most of his staff make speeches in front of crowds that are usually very carefully vetted

You missed my point entirely.

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Reply 10):
And certainly Mr. O'Reilly from the very popular and powerful Fox News channel also launches his "talking points" (or what I consider to be GOP propaganda) from the safety of a studio. . . so why can't Mr. Olbermann?

Both of them are paid for their opinions. I don't begrudge them their freedom of speech, just how they go about using it. In the entire diatribe he (Olbermann) doesn't offer even a hint of solution, just one big rant. Nowhere does he cite even a single example of one freedom that has been diminished since the President took office, nor does he acknowledge that he is free to complain about it without fear of reprisal. About the only good thing in the whole piece was his admitance that he in no way measures up to Edward R. Murrow. At least he got that part right.

Quoting Texan (Reply 11):
Gilligan and I do not agree on politics very often, but he is usually respectful and respects other people's opinions. Again, I don't necessarily agree with his arguments, but he has given examples of what he believes and he stands by them.

Thank you and right back at ya!  bigthumbsup 


User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1046 times:

Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 15):
I wasn't referring to just this one video so don't make assumptions. I'm talking about him in general and how I just don't like his style of reporting. Rummy is most definitely not on my Christmas Card list so don't attack me from that angle. I'm just saying I think Olberman sucks as a journalist.

Relax first of all, I wasn't attacking you. Don't take my post as such, I wanted to know you opinion on the topic of the thread, Olberman's response to Rumsfeld. Since you called him a blowhard, I assumed that you were saying this in response to his comments, and I don't think its such an odd assumption to make in the context of this thread.

Whatever your thoughts on Olbermann, I'd like to hear your response to the actual comments he made being discussed here, rather than making a blanket statement about Olbermann.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineTexdravid From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1364 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1040 times:

Keith Odorman can spew his nonsense all the time if he wants. I will defend that right. I also can have the right to ignore his sorry excuse of a newsman/commentator.

But hey, Odorman, you have won undying applause, love, and kisses from the Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, and other leftist/socialist/communist friends. Enjoy. Hope you enjoy the foul taste.



Tort reform now. Throw lawyers in jail later.
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7423 posts, RR: 50
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1027 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Texdravid (Reply 18):
Keith Odorman can spew his nonsense all the time if he wants. I will defend that right. I also can have the right to ignore his sorry excuse of a newsman/commentator.

Absolutely, it is weapon in disguise to let this guy run his flap. He was great when he commentated on sports, but his show now is just a snooze. It's nice to see rights protected, especially right to change the channel.

Quoting Texdravid (Reply 18):
But hey, Odorman, you have won undying applause, love, and kisses from the Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, and other leftist/socialist/communist friends. Enjoy. Hope you enjoy the foul taste.

Well, considering the dime a dozen opinion shows, he came late to the dance.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 16):
In the entire diatribe he (Olbermann) doesn't offer even a hint of solution, just one big rant. Nowhere does he cite even a single example of one freedom that has been diminished since the President took office, nor does he acknowledge that he is free to complain about it without fear of reprisal.

Pretty much sums up the lot. There used to be a time when pundits actually had an opinion, but nowadays the opinion seem to be scripted with a different bumper to open the show.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1027 times:

I watched it when it aired, I'm a viewer of Count Down with Keith Olbermann and I am not only entertained but now inspired. Keith is a reassuring voice amongst the other loud mouth ideologues.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinePIA777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1738 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1023 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 12):
Here is the video:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/0...-hell-of-a-commentary-on-rumsfeld/

I thought it was brilliant.

Keith Olbermann is awesome. I loved him in ESPN. This was an awesome
commentary.

PIA777



GO CUBS!!
User currently offlinePadraighaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1014 times:

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 4):
name me one single freedom that has been taken away by this administration, just one that has, by law, been taken away. Please just one will do.

Let's not ignore the elephant-in-the-room, which is of course the Patriot Act with it's hundreds of adjustments and changes to our laws and I note you are assuming no harm happens if no laws change.

There is considerable hypocrisy in the "single freedom" argument in that when abuses are brought to light, the issue becomes one where the media are unpatriotic and traitorous. So, when the abuses are unknown, it's whining; but when they surface, it's undermining the war.

Death-from-a-thousand-cuts doesn't require a single cut to be fatal.

As someone who loves aviation photography, I am saddened how paranoiac people at airports have become with 'suspicious' activities like photography. Photography during a flight was a big part of the fun of travelling for me; now because of the mess the current administration has made this is no longer possible. Rule changes? Law changes? I don't know, but the end result is the same.

There might not be any law change, but when the Secretary of State and the President imply I am unpatriotic because I ***disagree*** strongly with them, I think this is a noteworthy indication of how the winds are blowing. To the extent freedoms and rights are better served when senior statesmen have rational dialog, they are diminished by its absence.



Padraig Houlahan


User currently offlineDeltaGator From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 6341 posts, RR: 13
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 993 times:

Quoting Tbar220 (Reply 17):
I wanted to know you opinion on the topic of the thread, Olberman's response to Rumsfeld.

What does it matter? I made on a comment on Olberman and not on his comments concerning Rumsfeld. I personally think the Administration does go to far in questioning anyone's patriotism if they disagree with them but that is not what I was stating. Hell, count me among the non-patriotic then because I disagree with how the war on the ground is being handled but not the intent of the invasion.

At the end of the day I think Olberman is a shitty excuse for a journalist as much as I think O'Reilly is a bad example as well. Keith never should have left SoCal sports reporting. He did get one thing right...he couldn't hold Edward R. Murrow's jock.



"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
User currently offlineGilligan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 993 times:

Quoting Padraighaz (Reply 22):
Let's not ignore the elephant-in-the-room, which is of course the Patriot Act with it's hundreds of adjustments and changes to our laws and I note you are assuming no harm happens if no laws change.

Ah yes, the Patriot Act. Name a single change to the Constitution it has made. Just one. You are still free to do whatever it was you were doing on September 10, 2001. It gives the Government greater leeway in collecting information, but if you are not a terrorist, shipping money to terrorist organizations, or hanging out with terrorists what have you to fear? Absolutely nothing. The Patriot Act endangers fears in people like you who seem to feel that its more important to keep the government hamstrung in investigating terrorists and seem to be willing to say it's ok if some of us get blown up or killed by the odd terrorist act in the process.

Here is a link to the Secretaries speech:

http://www.defenselink.mil/Speeches/Speech.aspx?SpeechID=1033

I ask that you take a few minutes to read it and then reread Mr. Olbermann's piece. Name me one place where the Secretary impugned either the morality, intelligence, or loyalty of any American. If anything it is he (Olbermann) who is being insulting by referring to the Secretary and presumably the President as "transient occupants" as though they were occupying seats in a bus terminal somewhere. He seems to forget that the majority of Americans freely elected the President to his office. Who elected Mr. Olbermann? Nobody. He is a paid commentator and his opinions are worth whatever percentage of your cable bill goes to msnbc. Tell me what is wrong with these statements:

"It's a strange time:

When a database search of America's leading newspapers turns up literally 10 times as many mentions of one of the soldiers who has been punished for misconduct -- 10 times more -- than the mentions of Sergeant First Class Paul Ray Smith, the first recipient of the Medal of Honor in the Global War on Terror;
Or when a senior editor at Newsweek disparagingly refers to the brave volunteers in our armed forces -- the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marines, the Coast Guard -- as a "mercenary army;"
When the former head of CNN accuses the American military of deliberately targeting journalists; and the once CNN Baghdad bureau chief finally admits that as bureau chief in Baghdad, he concealed reports of Saddam Hussein's crimes when he was in charge there so that CNN could keep on reporting selective news;
And it's a time when Amnesty International refers to the military facility at Guantanamo Bay -- which holds terrorists who have vowed to kill Americans and which is arguably the best run and most scrutinized detention facility in the history of warfare -- as "the gulag of our times." It's inexcusable."


Or this:

"One of the most important things the American Legion has done is not only to serve and assist and advocate, as you have done so superbly for so much of the past century, but also to educate and to speak the truth about our country and about the men and women in the military.
Not so long ago, an exhibit -- Enola Gay at the Smithsonian during the 1990s -- seemed to try to rewrite the history of World War II by portraying the United States as somewhat of an aggressor. Fortunately, the American Legion was there to lead the effort to set the record straight."


The whole speech was a tribute to the American Legion, with whom he was speaking to go figure, and yet Mr. Olbermann and others in the press take one line out of well over 100 and twist it to their convenience. It was a tribute to the hard working men and women of the American Legion with many references to their past and present good works but you would never know that by Mr. Olbermanns dissertation. To just read or listen to his diatribe you would have thought that the Secretary did nothing but lambaste and disparage any American that disagrees with the administrations policies. Just one line, twisted out of context at that, out of a whole speech praising a worth-wile organization for their continuing efforts to help the American serviceman and servicewomen. It's more than disingenuous, it's downright disgraceful.



What about the abuses that the media takes part in? Abuses like taking pictures of a dead child, in different poses and different scenes, and then publishing them as if they were different children? Or taking pictures of the same woman losing the same house, if it was hers to begin with, twice inside of a month? Abuses like charging someone with treason for leaking supposedly classified information? Dragging their names through the mud and basically counting down with an almost gleeful approach to the time you think they will be hauled off in irons? Then when it is shown that they not only did not do the deed, but had nothing to do with the leak you don't even feel the need to say Oops, guess we goofed? Or publishing the details of a secret program that helped to identify terrorists and their financial accomplices? Tell me that is not an abuse.

What about reporting deaths, rapes, and all sorts of other terrible things based on hearsay, then denouncing the President and his advisers for their supposed failure to act and protect, only to find out later that the hearsay reports you broadcast were actually false? How about reporting as fact, near the end of an election cycle, a document that supposedly proves that a national leader somehow falsified his military record, only to find out later that it is a forgery? Or how about covering up and refusing to investigate with the same tenacity another national leader that probably did receive an award erroneously? How about camping outside the home of man and basically charging him with murder in a bombing, only to find out that he has been cleared of all wrongdoing and actually was pretty helpful? Yet in all these cases the press refuses to admit any wrongdoing nor apologize for the damage that they might have done in the process. Is that not an abuse?

I value the freedom of the press. At the same time I loathe the people in the press since in this day an age when the facts are so easy to get, they go out of their way to either ignore or distort the facts to achieve the maximum political damage that they can. With any freedom comes responsibility. Edward R. Murrow knew that, Keith Olbermann and a majority of his colleagues, to include Bill O'Rielly, do not.


You are still free to photograph airplanes, but unfortunately due to terrorists, which you seem to be ok with allowing to roam around unchecked, you have certain areas that are no longer available to you. But that's ok to Keith, terrorists have rights too. A line from the Secretaries speech seems to fit your outlook perfectly Padraig:

"Someone recently recalled one U.S. senator's reaction in September of 1939 upon hearing that Hitler had invaded Poland to start World War II. He exclaimed: "Lord, if only I had talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided!"

I prefer to look at the situation from Strother Martins character in the movie "Cool Hand Luke" "Captain road prison 36" when he said to Luke:

"What we've got here is... failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it... well, he gets it. I don't like it any more than you men."

I don't like having to send our military anywhere, nor do I like have to have increased surveillance on anyone anywhere, but some men just won't stop and it's something we have to do to protect ourselves.

Quoting Padraighaz (Reply 22):
There might not be any law change, but when the Secretary of State and the President imply I am unpatriotic because I ***disagree*** strongly with them, I think this is a noteworthy indication of how the winds are blowing.

I defy you to find one single reference in that speech, written or implied, that you are some how unpatriotic because you disagree with the administrations policies. I can cite numerous examples where Mr. Olbermann, in this one single piece, does just that to the Secretary.


25 AGM100 : Their you have it people... completly twisted. Just SAD
26 Padraighaz : This is not what you asked for. Let me remind you: So, when you get an answer you don't like, in the best Orwellian tradition, you make up a differen
27 Gilligan : I guess I just don't get it. I ask for simple answer and what do I get.... and you reply: So let me ask again, name me one single freedom that has bee
28 N1120A : Said rules are promulgated with the force of law and said rules are an exercise of legislative power delegated by Congress under the APA. The financi
29 Padraighaz : Nonsense. When you write: You are implying: 1. That the critics focused in on an insignificant part of the talk which is not the case and I demonstra
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Keith Olbermann's 09/11 Analysis And Comment posted Thu Sep 14 2006 07:17:10 by Singapore_Air
Anyone Watch The ABC News Special On JFK? posted Fri Nov 21 2003 14:44:27 by Alpha 1
Today Special Brat: Gary Sheffield posted Fri Oct 27 2006 03:35:19 by AirCop
Shirley Manson Has Me Excited! Watch! posted Fri Oct 27 2006 01:23:27 by NIKV69
Kimi's "I Was Having A S**T" Comment posted Tue Oct 24 2006 15:50:46 by DABZF
Fox Broadcaster Fired For Racial Comment posted Sun Oct 15 2006 13:53:34 by Homer71
Anybody Watch Letterman Thurs (Cool Video) posted Sat Oct 14 2006 06:23:56 by Boston92
Deutschland, Ein Sommermaerchen - Who'll Watch It? posted Thu Oct 5 2006 18:13:09 by Sabena332
Trent Lott's Racist Comment posted Sat Sep 30 2006 03:10:23 by AsstChiefMark
Thurs Night..Gonna Watch CSI Or Grey's Anatomy? posted Thu Sep 21 2006 23:24:00 by Futuresdpdcop